- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 22:02:09 -0400
- To: Michael Sintek <sintek@db.stanford.edu>, webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: sintek@db.stanford.edu, Raphael Volz <rvo@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
At 6:25 PM -0700 7/3/02, Michael Sintek wrote: >Jim Hendler wrote: >> >>... >> Jim H >>p.s. The issue of what goes in owl lite and what goes in full was >>resolved at the f2f - so we will be closing 5.15 and 5.16 > > >Dear Jim, > >please note that the issue what goes into owl lite and what goes into >owl full was NOT resolved ! > >Raphael & Michael Sintek Raphael and Michael - you are right - I was confused - checking the log I realize that I was confusing this with some other resolutions. > > >> >> >> >>At 12:54 PM -0400 7/3/02, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> >>>I don't seem to understand the issue process in this working group. >>>There is much work that involves making changes with respect to issues >>>that are not open and not closed, at least not according to the >>>issues document of 16 June 2002, including: >>> >>> issue 4.1 uniqueprop bad name >>> issue 4.2 cardinality constructs levels >>> issue 4.4 extra logical feature set >>> issue 5.1 uniform treatment of literal data values >>> issue 5.5 list syntax or semantics >>> issue 5.8 datatypes >>> issue 5.9 malformed DAML+OIL restrictions >>> issue 5.10 DAML+OIL semantics is too weak >>> >>>Some of this work involves the abstract syntax/formal specification >>>document that I am producing, some involves other documents. >>> >>>In addition, several issues are being implicitly addressed in that >>>ongoing work assumes that there will be no change from their status in >>>DAML+OIL, including: >>> >>> issue 2.5 closed sets >>> issue 2.6 ordered property values >>> issue 4.3 structured datatypes >>> issue 5.4 OWL:QUOTE >>> issue 5.6 daml:imports as magic syntax >>> issue 5.7 range restrictions should not be separate URIs >>> >>>I had thought that non-open issues should not be undergoing such >>>active work, and was actually surprised that the document I am >>>producing makes so many changes to non-open issues. >>> >>> >>>So, I am asking for clarification on how the issue process is supposed >>>to work with respect to the collection of documents being produced. >>>Is it OK for an appointed editor to produce documents that assume >>>particular resolutions of non-closed issues? Is it OK for an >>>appointed editor to produce document that assume particular >>>resolutions of non-closed, non-open issues? >>> >>> >>>I am also asking for clarification of how the issue process is >>>supposed to work in general. How are issues opened? If WG members >>>can request the opening of issues, I propose opening the following >>>issues because they are currently being explicitly or implicitly >>>addressed in the documents currently being produced, or in a couple of >>>cases, related to the documents currently being produced: >>> >>> issue 2.5 closed sets >>> issue 2.6 ordered property values >>> issue 4.1 uniqueprop bad name >>> issue 4.2 cardinality constructs levels >>> issue 4.3 structured datatypes >>> issue 4.4 extra logical feature set >>> issue 5.1 uniform treatment of literal data values >>> issue 5.4 OWL:QUOTE >>> issue 5.5 list syntax or semantics >>> issue 5.6 daml:imports as magic syntax >>> issue 5.7 range restrictions should not be separate URIs >>> issue 5.8 datatypes >>> issue 5.9 malformed DAML+OIL restrictions >>> issue 5.10 DAML+OIL semantics is too weak >>> issue 5.14 ontology versioning >>> >>> >>> >>>Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>>Bell Labs Research >>> >>> >>>PS: This is not the first time that I have asked for clarification on the WG >>>issue process. >> >> >> > > > >-- >----------------------------------------------------------------------- >| Michael Sintek | email: sintek@db.stanford.edu | >| Stanford Univ, DB Group | WWW : http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~sintek/ | >| Gates Bldg, Room 433 | phone: +1 650 725 3359 | >----------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 240-731-3822 (Cell) http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2002 22:02:24 UTC